Euristhe v. Beckmann

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
• Decided: April 15, 2024
• Docket: 23-10744
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

Case: 23-10744 Document: 42-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/15/2024

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ____________ United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 23-10744 Summary Calendar FILED ____________ April 15, 2024 Lyle W. Cayce Flavius N. Euristhe; Kimila S. Euristhe, Clerk

Plaintiffs—Appellants,

versus

William P. Beckmann; Scott Everette; John G. Aldridge, Jr.; David A. Spector; Joshua A. Hahn; Bill Shaddock; Mary L. Nicholson, in personal and public capacity as Tarrant County Clerk,

Defendants—Appellees. ______________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:23-CV-653 ______________________________

Before Jolly, Higginson, and Duncan, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam: * Flavius N. Euristhe and Kimila S. Euristhe filed a pro se complaint mostly alleging violations of various federal laws regarding a then-impending foreclosure sale of their property. In the instant appeal, they challenge the

_____________________ * This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5. Case: 23-10744 Document: 42-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/15/2024

No. 23-10744

denial of their motion for a temporary restraining order (TRO) and a preliminary injunction to stop the foreclosure sale. The denial of a TRO is not an appealable decision, In re Lieb, 915 F.2d 180, 183 (5th Cir. 1990), and because the property at issue has been sold, the district court’s denial of a preliminary injunction is now moot, see Dick v. Colo. Hous. Enters., L.L.C., 872 F.3d 709, 711-13 (5th Cir. 2017). Accordingly, the appeal is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction. To the extent that the Euristhes’ brief includes various motions, they are DENIED.